Humanist Counter-Theory in the Age of Misandry

All this goodness is pissing me off

I have always been a person that thrives on dissent. When reasonable and considered it’s a good, human check and balance for what we choose to believe. It puts what we think under a microscope and lets us put the ideas of others to the test as well. And, importantly, it staves off the forces of conformity and groupthink that so often lead us to mindlessness, feminism and really confused websites.

With that in mind I welcomed, prompted rather, the exchange here with writers at the Good Men Project regarding the question of what makes a good man, and indeed if we are making an egregious mistake by even asking it.

I challenged Tom Matlack, Lisa Hickey and other GMP writers to answer one simple question, which I pose here again:

Please inform us of anything, one single quality, that you think constitutes a part of being a good man – that does not also apply to being a good woman.

Tom, Lisa and someone named Jackie Summers all took their shots at answering.

I can only think of one thing that near adequately characterizes the responses. For those of you old enough to have seen the movie Cat Ballou, summon from your memory the image of Lee Marvin, cross-eyed drunk and hanging half-off his equally shit-faced horse, clutching the saddle horn with one hand and trying to shoot the side of a barn with a gun he barely held in the other…and missing.

Yes, he actually missed the side of the barn, but he came closer to the target than any of these people did to directly and concisely answering one really simple…fucking…question.

My personal definition of being a good man means trying to make more good decisions on a daily basis than bad. It means showing up for my wife and kids even when it’s not easy. It means trying to help someone else out of generosity rather than greed. It means telling the deepest truth I am capable of. And it means forgiving myself when I fail.

Sometimes I want to cut a foot-long piece of razor wire, run one end though my lower lip, and then yank it back and forth like I was trying to start a friction fire, just to not have to feel how painful it is to deal with this kind of bullshit.

Tom? TOM!! You didn’t answer the question. Fuck sake man, you didn’t even try. Every word you said could equally apply to a woman – these days even the part about coming home to a wife.

I am sorry. Really I am. Because if I am going to make myself believe that you were trying to answer the question, then I have to assume you are not smart enough to understand what I was asking, or maybe not smart enough to read a complete sentence. But I never thought you were stupid, and still don’t. It appears, though, that you think I am.

Since Tom wouldn’t, couldn’t, answer the question, let’s take a look at what Jackie Summers, a “big scary black guy with bowling balls for shoulders and tree trunks for thighs,” had to say, assuming he didn’t damage his keyboard with his jack hammers for fingers.

He did no better job than Tom. Actually, it was worse because in addition to the scary-bad metaphors about his body he also forces us to stomach a redundant stream of 5th grade level platitudes and Peter Pan observations. So says Summers:

Bad men exist. This is undeniable.

This is because bad people exist, and men are a subset of people. The world has always had bad men, because the world has always had bad people. Men who hurt. Men who maim. Men who kill.

Good men exist. Also undeniable.

This is because good people exist, and men are a subset of people.

The second time he said that “men are a subset of people,” my eyes started playing tricks on me. The article started to look like it was written in crayon. God knows it sounded like it.

I do understand, though, Jackie. I also have to repeat the fact that men are people all the time, usually to people like you, but that is a different story. Also, the simplified version of good and bad is so off the mark that it puts termites in your tree trunks. Men who kill and maim are only bad when they are not killing and maiming the right people, such as those with brown skin and oil deposits. The real good men are just future corpses. Really bad men are self-defined. Guess which group I’m in?

Relying on a Mr. Rogers approach getting his “points” across, Summers avoids the question entirely and cuts right to the core of the problem by demonstrating that the problem is, indeed, him.

Dig this from The Teach.

The world has always had good men, because the world has always had good people. Men who heal. Men who protect. Men who would sacrifice their lives and limbs for the greater good.

Ahhh, the “greater good.” The great, masculine meat grinder of history. I wonder again if it occurs to Jackie that frequently those men who sacrifice their “lives and limbs” are often the same ones doing the killing and maiming. But, I digress.

As I said, you won’t find an answer to my question within a light year of Summers’ article, or even any indication that he read the question. The theme, though, which he repeats with as much annoyance as he does the startling and edgy fact that “men are subset of people,” is simple; Men are expendable because “that’s how we all survive.”

He supports this by pointing out that in a dicey situation, his size, which he directly ties to his sex without actually saying so, make him the odds on choice for protecting any weak little women in his immediate area.

Welcome to the world of Jackie Summers, everyone. Please set your watches back 50,000 years, or at least back to the time before technology made self-protection an equal opportunity responsibility. By the way, Jackie, that was about the same time, at least according to all the patriarchy theorists, that “good” women were chattel and not much valued past their ability to close their mouths and open their legs at the same time. Such is the extent of the quazi-patriarchal pablum you have dished up to your readers; another reminder that it really is about chivalry, no matter how much you try to hide it behind what passes for postmodern enlightenment.

You, in virtual lockstep with GMP editorial slant, are simply an advocate for how best to exploit men in modern times.

I could write almost endlessly on the symbiotic relationship of old world chivalry and feminism, and how GMP has always been intellectually paralyzed by the dissonance that creates, but I’m already up to my waist in waste. So let’s get ‘er done before I have to start cutting that razor wire.

As I said, Tom didn’t answer the question at all. Jackie wrote as though the question never existed. That leaves Lisa Hickey, who actually answered the question, but apparently without the benefit of being aware of it. She says:

While there may be nothing inherently different in being a “good man” or a “good woman”, there are plenty of ways in which society tries to trick us into believing there are.

Gee, you mean like “The Good Men Project”? Jesus, where did I put those wire cutters? Lisa Hickey has just told us not only that there is nothing inherently different in being a “good man” or a “good woman,” but that anyone suggesting there is a difference is tricking us.

Irony’s a motherfucker, innet?

And that pretty much sums it up; a trio of chances, a triumvirate of abject failure. The only thing left is why.

Ms. Hickey came here and commented, somewhat to her credit, in response to this challenge and said:

I posted a response to Paul’s challenge as well. You may all hate The Good Men Project, but you can’t say we aren’t willing to engage.

Disregarding the accusation of hate for the time being, that is 100% correct, but keep in mind that Hugo Schwyzer “engaged” with Tom Matlack, as did Amanda Marcotte. I have engaged people like David Futrelle, who is loathe to hit a keystroke that would contribute to a word of truth. Simple engagement is not proof of integrity, but how you engage certainly can be.

What matters in this bad man’s opinion is engaging meaningfully; in dealing with questions and criticisms directly and honestly. Anyone can ask meaningful questions about the content of this site and our mission here. They can attempt to shoot holes in any of these articles, and they may be able to. Regardless of the possible findings, we will respond to those challenges head on. I have immense pride in that, and it is one of the reasons we have a very popular men’s website, with mostly male readers.

GMP’s failure to practice that same integrity is the explanation for their failure in this exchange. Men are not their target audience, just their target, and it shows.

Ms. Hickey, you said that you were not here to make friends or be liked by people, and so far that is working out very well. But it is not, at least in my case, because your ideas suck so badly. It is because your whole shtick does.

From engaging but not honestly, to auto-refreshing your site to artificially inflate your traffic position and advertising impressions, to running a men’s website that has trashed men more than understanding them, and encouraged men to sacrifice themselves more than solve their problems, all for the sake of a buck, you have literally begged for disdain. We may live in a shitty, relativist zeitgeist, but integrity is not so far out of style that lacking it can’t hurt you.

If it were not for the false advertising, it would not bother me so much. In your About Page, it says, “The Good Men Project is not so much a magazine as a social movement.”

How many phony page impressions does it take to make a movement?

Silly me, am I asking questions again?

I really do have hope that recent events at GMP are a good sign of times to come, that you really are, as you claim, embracing a policy that requires you to listen to your male readers, all of them, and react accordingly. Perhaps if you actually do that enough you will end up with interest from a male audience. Anything is possible.

But I also know that I have been reminded in this exchange that you have a great deal yet that you need to hear, not the least which is a lot of good people still respect honesty more than they do a slick angle.

You might as well have been addressing feminists for all the honest debate, addressing of the question and facts…in fact, I think that you were debating with feminists – who’da thunk it?

Never had any time for the Good Boy Project.

During their recent kerfuffle I saw a comment by a woman there saying something like, GMP wasn’t explicitly a feminist site, but really that is what it was.

Truth, straight from the horse’s ass

http://mensvoices.wordpress.com/ Tom Snark

“During their recent kerfuffle I saw a comment by a woman there saying something like, GMP wasn’t explicitly a feminist site, but really that is what it was.”

Well, their writers like Jackie Summers preach that the way a man can be good is by losing his life or limbs.

No wonder feminists love it.

http://antimisandry.com/ Marx

“Irony’s a motherfucker, innet?” This line is FTW!!!

http://manamongoaks.com/index.html Ray

“My personal definition of being a good man means trying to make more good decisions on a daily basis than bad.”

According to that definition, I guess he’d be a good man if he helped two little, old ladies across the street, then shoved the third one in front of a car. The rest of his maudlin tripe reads like something you’d find in a greeting card, or a fortune cookie, IMO.

Robert Full Of Rage

I am so disgusted with people who buy into this “good man” nonsense. Treating men as less than human is the wrong answer. Being a “good man” is the equivalent of being a mule who exists for the purposes of being whipped and serving others on a daily basis.

Why do you hear the term “good man” but never “good woman?” It is because everything is expected of men, but nothing is expected of women. Blue-pill society is obsessed with shaming and brainwashing men into compliance. The following is what blue-pill society considers to be a “good man”, based on personal experience:

“Your well-being is irrelevant. You are not allowed to be happy. You exist to serve women. You will always put yourself last. You will sacrifice everything you hold dear, and you better do it with a smile on your face. If you try to get help, you will be ridiculed until you either become compliant or commit suicide. Once you are no longer useful, you will be discarded like a piece of trash. No one has or ever will care about you.”

This is the type of garbage that men hear everyday. I am sick to death of men being told not to value themselves. My involvement with AVFM has made me more empathetic to my fellow man. I hope more people will start taking pride in helping men instead of taking pride in hurting men.

http://manamongoaks.com/index.html Ray

“The second time he said that “men are a subset of people,” my eyes started playing tricks on me. The article started to look like it was written in crayon. God knows it sounded like it.”

He sounded like a computer programmer stuck in an endless loop: if/then, if/then, if/then. I wonder if this guy can tie his shoes without a flow chart. Gee, what does this guy call a person who possesses both good and bad? That main set only comprises 99.9 percent (or more) of the people on earth. Duh!

http://mensvoices.wordpress.com/ Tom Snark

This article is brilliance. As hilarious as it is devastating.

I particularly enjoyed your takedown of that guy who thinks a good man is one who sacrifices life and limbs.

(No wonder feminists lap this shit up.)

http://manamongoaks.com/index.html Ray

“All this goodness is pissing me off”

From what I’ve seen of the GMP, it couldn’t be any more ludicrous if it had this as its theme song – playing every time someone visits their website.

http://none j24601

Amen to that, Paul.

When I think of TGMP all I can see is a Trojan horse; brim full of feminist dogma.

I know, I know, as the good guys at TGMP say, it’s the god darn patriarchy which imprisons us all. Women have been battling it for 30+ years, and have, thanks to feminism, succeeded in redefining their lives in their own terms. Now men can do likewise, and the good people at TGMP can show us the way: they can lead the way in the liberation of men from patriarchal oppression.

All well and good so far. But, and it’s a big but. Like Harvey, Elwood P. Dowd’s 6’ 3” rabbit, the patriarchy doesn’t actually exist, it’s merely a figment of someone’s imagination lodged in the collective conscience of feminists. Oh dear; no patriarchy, no TGMP.

If one were to ask me, that kinda makes meaningful engagement kinda impossible.

Just sayin’.

http://mensvoices.wordpress.com/ Tom Snark

Paul, I just went to the GMP website.

And right now, I am sitting here with a small length of razor wire in one hand, and as many cheese covered wacky fries as I can hold in the other.

I saw nothing but comment after comment of women discussing “what it means to be a good man” and how GMP is a great place because it “allows men to discuss how they feel.”

These people are patting themselves on the back for what is patently untrue. It is a site that allows WOMEN to discuss how men SHOULD feel, and they are apparently proud of this for the benefits they think this has for MEN.

Because women discussing and deciding upon these things FOR men is just as good as men having these conversations among themselves and coming to their own decisions, at a place like, oh I don’t know, AVfM.

Paul Elam

LOL, that image made me chortle.

I love the comparison, too.

Hey, any of you men out there that stumble on this website because of GMP, I have a message for you.

At GMP they “allow” you to discuss how you feel. At AVfM, we don’t wait for anyone to allow us to do a fucking thing.

gwallan

There’s an extraordinary arrogance to them isn’t there. They’d be screaming blue murder at any man telling women what or who they should be.

scatmaster

Snark and gwallan articulated for me what I was trying to get across but did not have the words to convey it.

Hmmm. I get a denied access message on that link. Can you email the image to me?

http://www.shrink4men.com/ Dr. Tara J. Palmatier

Sure.

http://thedamnedoldeman.com TDOM

“At AVfM, we don’t wait for anyone to allow us to do a fucking thing.”

Spoken like a good man.

TDOM

Kimski

“It is a site that allows WOMEN to discuss how men SHOULD feel, and they are apparently proud of this for the benefits they think this has for MEN.”

I agree. We are dealing with selfserving morons here, no doubt about it.
We should really start thinking about getting the ‘goodwomanproject’ going that Dr.T. has been talking about, and make it exclusively based on men-only comments. About time somebody started to make demands and setting up guidelines that goes in the opposite direction. If the definition of a ‘good man’ doesn’t go any further than even more selfsacrificing and disposability, then women would be in for a HUGE surprise on such a site. Men have been way ahead in that game for thousands of years.

As to Mr. Matlack’s answer, all I read was: ‘I can be an asshole, as long as I forgive myself.’ And as far as making selfsacrificing demands for men to be ‘good’, that sums the policy on the GMP up quite nicely, from my point of view.

http://www.shrink4men.com/ Dr. Tara J. Palmatier

Hi Kimski,

Would the GWP be satire or serious or both?

My prankster self has visions of running Miss Victim USA pageants in which contestants compete for who is the biggest victim of the Patriarchy.

Stuff like that.

Kimski

Considering the subject, how could it not become somewhat satirical, Dr.T.? 😉

But I think we should throw in a couple of harsh truths and reality checks that noone else wants to discuss, along with the satire. Just to even things up a bit. I’m personally getting more and more pissed with this ‘what men should do’-attitude in a world were women accounts for the majority of DV against children, as well as the filing for divorces, FRA’s, false DVA’s, pussy passes, etc.etc.

“Celebrating and commemorating the accomplishments of the feminist movement during the past 100 years.”

Wouldn’t that make a great statue??

justicer

“My prankster self has visions of running Miss Victim USA pageants in which contestants compete for who is the biggest victim of the Patriarchy.”
comment:
Any freshwoman class in Womyns Lit 101, is already running that event.

Primal

It’s time to create sites which encourage MEN to discuss how ‘good’ WOMEN should be/behave. Offense is the best defense. The taboo that prohibits talking about the dark side of woman needs to be blown to bits.

keyster

“…that allows WOMEN to discuss how men SHOULD feel…”

Not allowing women to share their unique perspective would be “patriarchal oppression”. Men are permitted to speak, as long as they’re not too antagonistic, abrasive or heaven forbid, intellectually HONEST!

Keep the tone in a passive-aggressive/FemSpeak style and you’ll be warmly embraced by the sisterhood at TGMP. Remember, as long as you’re a Bad Man trying to become a “Good Man”, they’re on your side.

Thanks to Patriarchal Constructs you are DEFECTIVE!

TGMP will give you the tools you need to repair yourself to woman’s satisfaction. It’s all “for the greater good”, that men sublimate themselves to feminine ideals.

BeijaFlor

Please pass the hemlock … thanks.

Transhuman

When I have replied to women posters on the site and confronted them with the idea you described, my comments were moderated out. TGMP steadfastly eliminates any reference to its feminist agenda and its primarily feminist contributors. If you argue against the feminist principle presented in any of the articles you are roundly chastised by the women posters, unless the moderators get to your post first in which case it never happened.

http://falserapesociety.blogspot.com/ Pierce Harlan

Great writing, Paul.

I do not read GMP because I know that Hugo what’s-his-name and Davey Futrelle write for them, and that tells me everything I need to know about that “project.” If I ever feel the urge to read smug, angry, and useless writing, I’ll head directly to the real deal, Amanda Marcotte’s site, and not waste time on the wannabes. But thanks for doing the dirty work for people like me.

http://www.shrink4men.com/ Dr. Tara J. Palmatier

That’s food for a good tagline.

GMP: If I want to be told what a worthless piece of shite man is, I’ll call my ex-wife.

TigerMan

Brilliant piece and you could have written it without references to Lee Marvin half on half off his horse and missing barn doors etc. Glad you didn’t though as it made a serious topic much more palatable. An excellent piece of reasoned argument in every way.
I see TGMP as a totally radical feminist project and nothing else. Without institutional and personal male chivalry victim feminism would soon DIE. Since men face appalling discrimination in many areas based purely on their sex we need to dismantle this false chivalry which results in discrimination and replace it with TGPP (The Good PEOPLE Project) that is where women need to PROVE their commitment to equality by lobbying along with men to end the discrimination we men face. (in health spending, education, family courts, criminal sentencing, social programs and negative portrayals in popular culture etc)
All of a sudden all I hear is the sound of brushwood rolling in the wind….

http://none universe

“Since men face appalling discrimination in many areas based purely on their sex we need to dismantle this false chivalry which results in discrimination and replace it with TGPP (The Good PEOPLE Project) that is where women need to PROVE their commitment to equality by lobbying along with men to end the discrimination we men face. (in health spending, education, family courts, criminal sentencing, social programs and negative portrayals in popular culture etc)
All of a sudden all I hear is the sound of brushwood rolling in the wind….”
– Here, I’m going to rustle up the rolling bushes a little more – all this discrimination, as you’ve noted Mr. TM, recently imposed more upon men and boys at the request and doings of feminist females.
But still, their handlers and enablers have a part in this as well. (Oops, shouldn’t have provided such an easy escape clause to feminists who have great difficulty accepting accountability and responsibility for their actions – but that won’t stop myself and others from reminding them. Derail the public gravy train to these chauvinistic bigots).

TigerMan

Yes and as I have said elsewhere our ultimate fight is with those enablers themselves (who are most often men but not exclusively by a long chalk). Women overall it seems care too much about their perception of vested interest to challenge it and feminists want to perpetuate it not end it (the fucking hypocrites!). Women are also our sisters, cousins, nieces, mothers and grandmothers as well as wives and friends. That they have been as silent as they have so far is a deep shame on them that they need to be loudly reminded on at every opportunity.

OneHundredPercentCotton

Just a question for you, Tiger, as I have wondered the same thing.

DO you ever ask those women their opinions or why they are silent?

In my own life I know my son’s look at me with alarm when I speak out loud to them as I do here.

They look at me like I’ve lost my mind…so I shut up.

If I told my husband I wrote on a site like this his reaction would be an annoyed “Why are you writing stuff to strange men”?

For all the bad things that have happened, it’s remarkable how they themselves make excuses or even defend the women who have done them harm.

Sting Chameleon

They’re afraid to rock the boat. And realizing that they’re seen as nothing but pawns of others is far too horrifying so they’d rather live in denial.

http://none universe

It does appear problematic that our female relatives and the state, including those enablers of both, wish to perpetuate their combined and separate status quo. Problematic but not impossible to solve.

I agree, TM, that our female relatives have remained curiously silent while their men and boys over the decades were selectively gored by the state. I believe however that enough commenters here in these pages have the finger on their pulse – team woman. But now there is a burgeoning men’s narrative that can effectively answer decades of feminist rhetoric like no other time before. And essentially it appears to be our duty as men to set our female family members on the straight path. If that means a constant reminding to them of their unjust ignorance toward men then so be it.

The enablers pose another challenge. They are shrouded within an onion layer of social protections giving the appearance of approval and invulnerability. But not so much more these days as the varied cogency of our combined brutally honest positive writings and awarenesses will inspire men into the current social landscapes. It’s never too late.

http://www.artistryagainstmisandry.com Jade Michael

Paul, you have a strong stomach for engaging these people to begin with. I used to sporadically read sites like TGMP (prior to finding MRM sites) and they just made me more despondent than I was before reading them. I found TGMP especially insulting and degrading towards men and women alike. And I was referred there by people I respect.

Cut to the future – now I refer those same people here and to other MRM sites and I get zero response if I don’t get looked at sideways. People just can’t handle reasonable opposition when it is unapologetic in its approach. Fuck ’em.

http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

Bloody internet !

Before the internet I would have wiped me clacker with that TGMP publication.

Now I have no choice but to use boring ole’ dunny paper… bah!

Zorro

The GoodSissyBoyProject: It’s my personal canary-in-the-coalmine. Whenever I see a link on a web site or blog for the GoodCuntlickerProject, I am certain to dislike that site or blog. Amy Alkon’s site is a case in point.

What a steaming pile of feminist false flag dog vomit.

Paul, epic post!

AntZ

Magnificent.

Roderick1268

The Good Men Project – according to woman’s values (or lack of them) maybe.
The Good Manservant Project?
The Good Staff Project?
OR
The White Knight Site?
If I crawl up that hole and submit myself to woman girls and corrupt men.
I might even get an applause when they throw my old carcass on the fire.
You could too bitch. – If you don’t listen to that darn Paul Elam!
Rod.

justicer

Nicely done, Paul.
I can’t find a jot in TGMP that isn’t woman-generated or feminist, period,full stop. The point of departure of these folks is that male behavior is “bad” and that men need to be humanized by correcting themselves into the new, female-defined goodness.
I was frankly astonished at how unsophisticated their rhetoric is and how little self-awareness they possess.
The pap is female, condescending, and sermonizing.

I was also surprised to read that this “Jackie” is a black man and that he’d bought into this Grade-school Hygiene-Class lecturing.
Jackie, if you’re reading this, GET BACK TO BEING A BLACK MAN. You don’t need to be socially engineered into a white knight; you need to be ready to define manhood; and proud of yourself on your own terms.

justicer

By the way, sort-of OT, but here we go again.
This morning, on CBS’s morning show, there it was: a woman just acquitted of a charge of murder, for dispatching her husband, who appears, from the wife’s evidence, to have been abusive.
After shooting him and disabling him, she took his own gun and put 11 more bullets into him as he lay on the floor. The Jury acquitted, buying the theory that she still feared for her life.
The CBS host cooed her admiration for the lady and was happy for her acquittal. Nobody probed the concept of commensurate resistance which is a pillar of our justice system.
The lady gave her version of the defense, all manifestly coached and scripted, word-for-word.
No one from the prosecution team was on the show. Also unavailable was the dead husband who appears to be still editing his own version of these events.

Kimski

Sounds like another candidate for register-her.com., as well as business as usual.
-Anyone ever seen a husband get away with that line of defense, BTW?

justicer

Oh yeah, but we can’t blame her for having fun on t.v. at getting acquitted; also, can’t claim to disbelieve her version of the man, until we try the relationship she was in, rather than her 11 superfluous and enthusiastic gunshots.
You should have heard her relating “why I didn’t leave him”; it was about as original as a recipe for water.

Honestly, let’s register the females who hosted and produced the show — the real offenders in this tale.

TigerMan

Was that the same woman that escaped the jury guilty verdict by a backroom deal that the judge allowed which allowed her to walk without jail time?

justicer

Sorry, Tiger, this was just something I glimpsed on CBS. I spun the google dial a bit but was unable to trace this story back any further.

http://none universe

What an essay.

Wh-a-am.
I can feel the tremor, and all the dust and debris settling on me all the way over here where I sit.
A little brushing off, some eye cleansing tears of laughter later and I’m as good as new.
Phew.

(Don’t do this to yourselves GMP people. Allow me to surrender you on your behalf).

Thanks Paul.

keyster

The essence of the difference is that TGMP will keep asking the questions until they get answers that meet with their Progressive/Elitist/Egalitarian worldview, (which is indefinite).

AVfM answers the questions boldy and directly, and these answers contradict their belief system, makes them uncomfortable. This is why they skirt the hard questions with rhetorical platitudes and non sequitur anecdotes, (answers without answering).

You’re trying to ask the indocrinated to question their reality. It will never compute. They can’t imagine there’d be any doubt, because they’ve never dared permit themselves to consider it.

Imagine the “Dear Leader” of North Korea. The Feminist narrative is THEIR dear leader. It’s beyond reproach or inquiry. They don’t understand how any question could even exist. It’s an irrefutable, righteous and noble cause. It’s getting the Vatican to acknowledge the Virgin Birth was a hoax.

As for MEN? …well it’s always been Open Season!
Keep the “Critical Theory” pressure on, and eventually they’ll come around and submit themselves for correction.

Lol.
The really nauseating part is that, no matter what they say about him or do to him, he’ll still make excuses for them and paint them as victims and the other (ass-)cheek gets turned for the umpteenth time.

People keep calling him mangina but I think that’s insulting men and vaginas alike.

scatmaster

Ya know. I am going to pour myself a glass of claret tonight and celebrate…..

Enough with the pretentious bullshit.
A straight bourbon and my toast will be:

FUCK YOU SCHWYZER

SCHADENFREUDE YA MISERABLE EXCUSE FOR A HUMAN BEING

Yes I was yelling but I feel so much better now.
Celebrate good times come on.

Did you even stop to think just for one second that my potted cactus might not like that ?

BeijaFlor

Oh, God, the cactus. Think of the poor cactus.

:lmao:

TigerMan

Popcorn – lots of it! 😉

http://mensvoices.wordpress.com/ Tom Snark

Comment on second link

““What I actually think is that trying to murder your girlfriend is abhorrent.” What a curious way of putting it. It’s not really something that it’s possible to have a different take on it, is it? It’s not optional, it’s not ambiguous, it’s not really something there should be another viewpoint on it. I keep coming back to the all the people saying, “Sure, trying to kill your girlfriend is bad, but….

Talk of change and forgiveness and wishing him well doesn’t apply here, I don’t think. This isn’t a tiff over doctrine over theory. This isn’t Mary Daly versus whomever.”

So, Mary Daly, who advocated killing 90% of men and total matriarchy, is fine. That’s just a question of doctrine. Not going too far at all.

Hugo, has spent his life advocating for feminism, and once tried and failed to kill one person. TOO FUCKING FAR

I wonder if they would be freaking out so much if Hugo had tried to kill a man. No, they’d probably be celebrating him. Misandrist pieces of scum.

http://mensvoices.wordpress.com/ Tom Snark

From the way they talk about Schwyzer, you’d think he was some undercover MRA who has been posing as a feminist all along to misdirect and discredit their movement.

http://mensvoices.wordpress.com/ Tom Snark

This comment thread is the gift that keeps on giving.

“let’s not forget Hugo’s supporters and fans, who are hanging around his facebook page saying some truly vile things about the women who have been critical of him. For instance, one woman said that perhaps we should be dealt with “Saudi style” by having our hands cut off. Hugo “liked” that comment.”

Mmm, sitting back and watching feminists fight each other.

http://mensvoices.wordpress.com/ Tom Snark

“Branwen, I obviously agree with you about Hugo, but that comment about Saudi-style execution actually wasn’t about us (his “critics”). They were discussing abusers. Just wanted to correct that, sorry”

That’s okay then, and not at all fucked up and barbaric. Apparently Hugo thinks that lopping bits off of people’s bodies is a legitimate punishment in civilized societies, for ‘abusers,’ however you define this. Which would include Hugo. And Hugo likes this idea.

http://mensvoices.wordpress.com/ Tom Snark

You know, sometimes, I think men here and at The Spearhead come across as a little bit angry.

But holy hell, just skim through those comments at Feministe. These women are ANGRY. Every single comment goes GRRRRRR!!! And FUCK!!! And hackneyed phrases indicating RAAAAGE!!! Like this is THE BIGGEST THING IN THE WORLD RIGHT NOW. Huge group of girls etc.

http://mensvoices.wordpress.com/ Tom Snark

“They’re so forgiving and understanding when it’s Schwyzer. How come they’re so incredibly cruel when it’s women who’ve been harmed by men like him, or by his actions, or by the way he’s been sucking up to MRAs for years?”

Schwyzer sucking up to MRAs?

lol wut

We’ve been hating on him for a lot longer than you people

http://mensvoices.wordpress.com/ Tom Snark

Several times, Hugo’s defenders are referred to as “MRAs.” A linked site is referred to as “MRA.” It’s nothing of the sort.

Apparently ‘MRA’ is the new ‘patriarchy’ for these people: as in, “anything I disagree with that has a plausibly male origin.”

They don’t actually know what MRAs believe, they’ve just about recognized it’s a term used by people who aren’t feminists.

http://mensvoices.wordpress.com/ Tom Snark

I cracked up at the following from Amanda Marcotte. She makes a grand entrance at post 149. Apparently Amanda is so precious that being disagreed with by a lot of people online is actually ‘triggering’ and in her mind the same thing as domestic violence.

“I am leaving it at that and, for mental reasons, not coming back. The mob mentality that forms during a takedown gives me flashbacks to my domestic violence experiences, and I don’t need that.”

Initially, Hugo was supported and even exalted by several political-victory feminists — including Marcotte, Filipovic, and of course Thorn herself. These individuals perceive a historical opportunity to permanently reduce all men to economic, scientific and political insignificance. They want to win, and they don’t care who their allies are.

However, as more and more genuine former victims vented their outrage, the tide slowly turned. The cold utilitarian calculus of the political-victory feminists determined that Hugo was no longer useful. They turned on him immediately.

Hugo is not a dead man walking. He is just a warn-out appliance. There is no genuine outrage in the control room of feminist governance. Hugo is broken, that is all. So they discarded him.

Now, he is just like every other man on earth. When his utility is reduced to zero, he goes into the rubbish heap along with the rest of the trash.

That is just how they see us.

Adi

Lets start a “bad men project”.

Since we’re all bad by default we have nothing to lose so we may as well behave badly from the start.

rams888

Unbelievable, talk about closing ranks; while the two guys from GMP toe the feminist line it’s the woman that feigns a little sympathy, an olive branch, I don’t think so.

Primal

How about the KKK setting up a cute site called The Good Negro Project? Imagine the righteous outrage. GMP deserves no less outrage until Lisa Hickey and Tom Matlack disassociate GMP from the lying feminist scum who currently run the culture. This needs to happen IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS too…before I will ever trust GMP to speak for me. What we have now is (confused) cunt and male cunt conduct from the leadership which merely serves to obfuscate the underlying bigotry. ANY website which tolerates any form of misandrist mainstream feminism AS it purports to speak for men is evil.

http://thedamnedoldeman.com TDOM

Paul, is it too late to take up your challenge? I’m not sure I’ve done any better than those loons over at GMP, but I’ve given it a shot. I’m submitting an article for your consideration.

TDOM

Paul Elam

Never too late!

http://thedamnedoldeman.com TDOM

It’s been uploaded. After reading what you had to say about this other loons I was half afraid to write it. but at least I know you’ll be honest.

TDOM

Sue

Possibly we should abandon this idea of a “good man” because it denotes built-in stereotypes (much like what it is to be a “good woman”) These phrases conjure up descriptions that have been in place for centuries and no longer apply. I cringe when I think of the pressure my son will grow up with to be a “provider, protector, etc”. All people, men and women, should provide, protect, nurture, love, pursue our dreams, and have the freedom to do so.

keyster

Your husband is suddenly unable to work Sue.
You will now need to be the provider of your family while he is at home. You will feel all the pressures that exist to pay the bills and put food on the table.

Are you OK with that?
Are you OK with your son marrying a woman that will provide and protect him?

Paul Elam

I am not a religious man, so I don’t normally say this, but AMEN!

Tawil

“…and have the freedom to do so.”

Thats the part that captures what feminism has done in the last 40 years- taken male chivalry as man’s choice, and changed it by law into legal duty enforced my an arsenal of punishments. This “no choice” chivalry is what has made the long gynocentric tradition suddenly unsustainable- slaves will always revolt against such tyranny.

Primal

How about ‘in place for millenia’? Women CANNOT protect or provide as well as men can…nor can men comfort or nurture as well as women can. This biological essentialism is a fact of life/love and 0will be around forever notwithstanding feminism social constructionist nonsense which says otherwise. There is no freedom here unless one is willing to lose one’s society to the contemporary barbarians.

That’s why feminism is such an unbelievable rape of respect from males….it presupposes that freedom (for women only) is possible without reference to historical realities…while at the same time it rapes men to provide that very freedom…and scapegoats men as men to boot. Pretty neat trick for a bunch of insane screamers but one that will soon backfire with some really ugly consequences. Let’s hope that good women come to their senses before the whole house of cards collapses because no man in his right mind will take this ‘deal’ sitting down.

I believe we need good men (not Tom Matlack) more than ever now…which is probably why Ron Paul is a rock star to young people. BUT good men need to be good to women and bad men (feminist flunkies) in an extremely conditional manner. Today’s infantile entitled women need to be shown the old fashioned way that utterly priceless male goodness comes at a very high price. Withholding goodness from evil women or idiotic men is essential to prevent male suicide and to school the loathsome little girls who run this Cunt-culture on the consequences of insulting males as males…and of condemning the very patriarchy that they (feminists) depend for protection.

Sue

Primal, I disagree that men cannot comfort or nurture as well as women. I completely reject that as a “fact of life.” It is this assumption and stereotype that keeps custody laws so warped. I also disagree that women cannot protect or provide as well as men. Barring some physical advantages, women can be quite protective, and it is commonplace for women to be a provider or even THE provider in the family. Both have the ability to do both – it is our mindset and stereotypes that keep men and women in the tiny boxes we use to define them.

Primal

Disagree or agree, you can’t change biology. Testosterone fueled animals are always better protectors than comforters and the same goes in reverse for estrogen fueled animals. The loathsome ‘like-like-like’ Valley Girl nonsense that feminists have spread is just that NONSENSE.

Both sexes do have the ability to do both but NOT equally well. Even The Grey Lady (NYT) which regularly shills swill for feminist bigots ran an article on the inferiority of female athletes in terms of vulnerability to serious injuries relative to the far tougher (male) sex. Given a battle that lasts longer than an hour or two, I’d sure want males to do my fighting for me. It’s no accident that the majority of the close combat in the world is always done by men.

It’s false feminist sponsored mindsets and stereotypes that keep (ignorant) males imprisoned and allows women to rape, pillage and plunder male power with near total impunity. Biological essentialism is here to stay because no matter how many robots we have to do our murder for us there will always be biological (female and male) imperatives running the robots. As far as single mother providers go, let’s see what happens the them when this airy-fairy farce of an economy collapses. When the chips are down each sex will do what it alone can do best because that is how societies in trouble survive. That inconvenient reality is heresy to feminist bigots but thankfully MOTHER Nature is immune to the bigoted ideological machinations of a bunch of female baboons.

Rper1959

Ok Logic!

Men following AVFM exit, this is undeniable. People follow AVFM and men following AVFM are a subset of people. Women follow AVFM etc etc Ergo men are good, or is it bad? WTF

Challenge ideologues core fallacies and you will always be faced with such feeble attempts to misdirect and avoid answering.

Perhaps the team a GMP would like to explain how feminism is contributing to gender equity in society whilst they are at it? No doubt the can go on endlessly – explaining “the (plenty of) ways in which society tries to trick us into believing” it does.

Paul Elam

Game, set, match.

AntZ

I wonder if MRAs would devour one of our own, a la Hugo Schwyzer, if the roles were reversed?

Imagine that Mary voluntarily wrote a contrite admission that in 1998, she was an alcoholic with a history of violent and controlling behaviour towards her ex-husband “John”. When John tried to leave her, Mary falsely accused John of domestic violence. John was arrested and jailed overnight, then released to lawyer bills and an order of protection. Mary tried to have the charges dropped, but they lived in a no-drop state and John was indicted anyway. Eventually John was cleared on a technicality, but he was financially and emotionally a broken man. Needless to say, John lost custody, and faced visitation and crippling child support. Mary denied John’s visitation rights whenever it suited her, sometimes because she wanted something from him, other times just out of spite (usually when she was drunk).

Three years later, Mary sobered up and tried to make amends. She contacted John and agreed to a fair, equal time, joint physical custody co-parenting plan that suited them both. John never forgave Mary for the violence and betrayal, but they both moved on and were cordial enough to make co-parenting work.

How would MRAs react to this?

1) Would Mary’s prominence in the movement drop? Temporarily, I think so.

2) Would every MRA turn on Mary? Would she face a burning wall of hostility, anger, and bitterness from her former friends? Never. A handful of people would vent for a while, but nothing like the cauldron of hate that is boiling on every feminist blog.

3) Would we begin to organize a movement to have Mary fired from her job?

?!? What is going on ?!?

Compared to almost-harming one woman, the cost of Hugo’s crimes against men, boys, and fathers would be difficult to tally. This is not a man that I have any pity for. Even so, it would not occur to me to try to get Hugo fired from his city-college teaching job.

As I watch the gleeful cruelty with which they dismember one of their own, I am mindful never to forget how dangerous our feminist enemy is. She feels no compassion, no remorse, and no pity.

keyster

I’m saddened by the fact that, much like there are feminists that hate all men, there are MRA’s that hate all women.

I do think that men are more prone to understand and accept the redemptive qualities inherent in all people though. It’s expressed in our mythologies.

Primal

Yes, in the end we are going to have to find ways to love and ‘live’ each other once more and that isn’t going to be easy…but we really have no choice if we hope to survive as a free nation.

http://truthjusticeca.wordpress.com/ Denis

I wasn’t surprised by the response.

He’s a shifty politician and far from dumb. He knows that he can play on other people’s ignorance or ideological allegiances and continue to get away with it, with only minority dissent.

I had a good laugh at Tom’s whinging about people accusing him of having an agenda. Sorry Tom, you won’t get any sympathy with that violin.

I highly doubt anyone is going to invest a half million dollars in a project associated with Ms. Magazine just so men can have a discussion about good men. There is an agenda at play and playing dumb isn’t going to work forever.

http://truthjusticeca.wordpress.com/ Denis

I think it’s a mistake to write Tom off as dumb or deluded. It’s also implausible to think that some dumb guy gave another dumb guy a half million dollars to talk about Good Men in association with Ms. Magazine.

I wonder though, how much of Tom’s writing have you read to conclude that he is stupid but still not know his motivation? He’s able to adapt, but only minimally while he continues to avoid male issues and reasserts feminist ekwality and traditional values of male utility and disposability.

I suppose it’s all relative, but Futrelle and Schwyzer are insignificant compared to men like Tom Matlack and Tony Porter.

http://www.thereformedbuddhist.com/ Kyle Lovett

I don’t know what to make from some of the comments on that post over at GMP. I haven’t read so much misandric dribble in awhile.

Take this one from a person who calls themselves Matthew:

“I love your perspective. Judgment. So important. I see many intelligent, loving, and capable men through away their happiness over one split second of bad judgement. I have debated this issue with friends and family for years, trying to understand why. One thing that I have learned is that the males do not develop the capacity to make responsible judgments until they are in their mid twenties. The male brian does not have this capacity as quickly as a female. In many ways this explains why my teenage boys will do crazy things and act like idiots. I often wonder if they have just lost their senses all together. I have to remember that my sons are not biologically capable of complex decision making and they need lots of structure and support while they on this journey. But men, why are we often so thick and simply make poor choices? I would love to know so I can stop the cycle in my family.”

And another from someone named David Byron:

“Maybe there’s a sense in which a Good Man is something you become whereas for women it’s more about who you are. I am not saying that is true just that there’s a feeling about that. That sense also make the word “project” have another meaning namely that being a Good Man is a Project because it is always about Becoming and about Doing.

A good woman is essential unto herself. She is. “Because you’re worth it” advertises to women, and “A man’s gotta do what a man’s gotta do” to men.

I wonder if that whole thing about “men are human doings and women are human beings” has to do with men’s perceived active role to a woman’s passive role. Within a woman’s traditional sphere, the home, those aspects are reversed so whereas you hear more about a Good Man than a good woman I think you hear more about a Good Mother than a good father. A mother is active and goal orientated.”

Then this gem of a “don’t be a criminal and buy shit for your wife makes you a Good Man” from a person named Al:

“Being able to actually hear the word no and cease unwelcome attention. Not tarring all women with the same brush. Celebrating the natural beauty of women and assisting when possible the removal of Madison Avenues constant, never ending stream of bullshit that tells every women that in order to get a man, keep a man or change a man she needs to do…(fill in the blank).

How about buying your favorite woman a pair of flats if she wears heels all the time (that put her spine out of alignment all for the sake of looking (and feeling) more attractive.

How about not getting women drunk with the intention of having sex or at the very least being totally honest about how you would like the date to end (they might even be impressed with such a rare display of honesty).

Maybe if you don’t date women it’s easier to know what makes a good man.”

Really, really? Do people really buy into this kind of shit? I’m at a lose for words, and if this is the kind of audience GMP brings, then no wonder they hate men’s rights. They think men are inferior that need to be trained so that they can live in the same world as women who are blameless. THIS IS GENDER POLITICS? WTF are these people smoking?

http://truthjusticeca.wordpress.com/ Denis

“if this is the kind of audience GMP brings”

Yes, their Alexa profile shows that it is a mostly female audience. Many MRAs that would counter such drivel have already been blocked.

“THIS IS GENDER POLITICS?”

It’s far more representative of our major opposition than the radfems.

http://www.shrink4men.com/ Dr. Tara J. Palmatier

Do people really buy into this kind of shit?

Bingo.

WTF are these people smoking?

Probably some really bad shit. Most of them are on the east coast, right? 😉

http://www.thereformedbuddhist.com/ Kyle Lovett

For some reason I now have that song Eastern Boys and Western Girls stuck in my head! Gee, thanks Dr. T

mccrorie

The anti white-male sentiment in those links is disturbing. Obviously, being privileged means being treated differently based on the colour of your skin and perceived social standing…

“Schwyzer is a relatively Big Name in feminism, he teaches gender-themed courses at a city college (I don’t know if he has tenure), he contributes (or contributed to, before recently resigning) to several very prominent feminist and gender issues blogs, he’s co-authored a book, and he has a fancy self-promoting website with his photo attached (he’s a conventionally attractive white man).

Much of this- the blogs, the gigs, the promotion- I believe is a function of white male privilege.”

The last part in parenthesis… it’s an appeal to a shared prejudice! For fucks sake! And how is promotion, a BLOG and ‘gigs’ a function of white-maleness?

I suspect I could not converse with this person without repeatedly telling her to get fucked – but I suppose that just another function of my privilege to which I’m blissfully unaware…

http://counterfem.blogspot.com Fidelbogen

Yes, racism is one of the arrows in the feminist quiver. Only, they use it chiefly as a means of derailing and controlling the narrative.

An important aspect of rhetorical discipline is to not be sucked in by such tactics. When they try to pull the conversation into certain areas, they must be unceremoniously pulled back onto the straight-and-narrow.

And not just unceremoniously, but smoothly and non-chalantly. Never missing a beat.

mccrorie

another comment

“And since educated white men are (overall) relatively good at saying the “right thing” whether or not they believe it, it’s easier for them to slip in to the group.”

in response to doing the right thing as opposed to just saying the right thing and doing the wrong thing…

just… wow

justicer

Since we’re on the topic of What Makes a Good Man As Opposed to a Bad Man, I think this little item is on-topic.
Which is purty rare for me so listen up.
Overheard tonight on the NBC evening News. The newsreader was a young woman whose name I can’t recall, and NBC doesn’t seem to list it anywhere.
Anyhoo, the item’s headline was this “Women Report Feeling More Pain Than Men.”
Naturally, this idea of feeling pain sets up a sympathy for our poor longsuffering oversuffering female companions, which might have been NBC Female News’s objective.
But we also have to concentrate on the word Report, rather than the words “Feeling More Pain.” Oh that’s different, it’s about what females say about pain, versus what men say.
And sure enough, there it was. The newsreader read her item about women being more beset by pain, and then said this: “Of course, that could be because fewer men admit to feeling pain.”
Now, in a gender-neutral world, we might praise men for that. But not if we use the word “admit.”
The correct verb is “complain of,” not “admit to.”

The Oxford Online Dictionary defines “to admit to” as “to confess to something.” So there it is, those dishonest males! Not ready to confess that they’re feeling pain!

A psychologist would elaborate on how important it is, to a woman, to be among people who confess to feeling what they’re feeling.
But the larger point is that you “admit” to a personal fault, while you “complain” about something that’s not your fault.
And that’s what NBC wanted us men to do: ADMIT IT, YOU’RE JUST AS WEEPY AS US WOMEN.

“At the party, the mangina studied the Mra from a distance and then in unison, with a glob of other manginas, did consume much alcohol before encircling him. The Mra was then accosted with garbled screeches from the glob, and was in effect ‘manginerd’. An unsightly scuffle did ensue shortly before the glob scrabbled sideways to the exit similar to that of a grouping of crabs.”

She looked scared or something when she saw me using that rabbit like a kind of strange, fluffy but effective fleshlight.

BeijaFlor

Will you settle for the Voice of the Lobster?

I must perforce make that reference, as a recovering Scientologist.

There is a “training routine” or TR in Scientology – or, at least, there was when I was involved with Scientology, in the 1970s – that involved quotations from Lewis Carroll’s “Alice In Wonderland”. They involved quotations from the book – and my ultimate favorite was to use “The Voice Of The Lobster:”

‘Tis the Voice of the Lobster, I heard him declare,
“You have baked me too brown, I must sugar my hair.”
Like a duck with its eyelids, so he with his nose
Trims his belt and his buttons, and turns out his toes.
When the tide is all out, he is gay as a lark
And will talk in contemptuous tones of the Shark;
But, when the tide rises and sharks are around,
His voice has a timid and tremulous sound.
I passed by his garden, and marked, with one eye,
How the Owl and the Panther were sharing a pie:
The Panther took pie-crust, and gravy, and meat,
While the Owl had the dish as its share of the treat.
When the pie was all finished, the Owl, as a boon,
Was kindly permitted to pocket the spoon;
While the Panther received knife and fork with a growl,
And concluded the banquet …

Ya know, I could never remember the end of that poem. Ask Alice, as Jefferson Airplane asserted!

Booyah

I posted this on GMP. Doubt it will make it thru moderation though lmao.

Your comment is awaiting moderation.

This whole site is a feminist joke…..
You are a disgrace to men and a huge part of the problem.
Real men should read AVoiceForMen

Australian and Amercian men are facing the most diabolical civil rights annihalation ever.
Theyre just watching it happen due to sick feminists and theyre programming.

Ridiculous new domestic violence laws that if they applied to women as they did men. Men are being specifically written out as victims, while being prosecuted with the presumption of guilt for the most outlandish and ridiculous charges. Not talking to your abusive partner is now GO TO JAIL! Of course she is not able to be abusive legally coz these laws dont apply to women!

Wake up men. We need a good woman project which has women who will stand against this blatant sexism. This feminist fueled drivel is just mimicking the mass media.

Either fight for your rights or avoid women altogether. Those are the only sane options for Australian and American men.

————————————————

Thank you for the great work you are doing Paul. I live in Australia and this new legislation scares the bejeebers out of me especially as ive many times suffered at the hands of physically and emotionally abusive women. Involvement with them under this legislation puts me in prison.

I appreciate the warning I recieved from you and would never have found. Combing thru the 200 page deliberately misleading document would not have been something I did.

I really think that you guys should start a social networking database and have it prominently displayed on the homepage. Social networking is a huge phenomenom and since all media is pro feminist you should really try to capitalize on it and promote as much as possible thru it.

I have started a group on Experience Project called “I believe in equality, not male oppression” Ive written a few articles for it but havent really even tackled VAWA and probably wouldnt have time too.

We need as many people as possible in these groups and we need to fill them with articles. Even if they’re straight rips of articles from here.

Anyhow a social networking database will help people join groups in the SN site or encourage them to join other SN sites to help build the cause. The more homepages its on the more attn. it recieves.

Anyhow Im a new kid on the block. (first post) so if Im stating something already covered my apologies and keep up the fantastic work. Youve probably saved my life and Im eternally grateful =)

BeijaFlor

Booyah, I would venture to assert that Paul would accept and stand behind any reference you might possibly make to A Voice For Men.

I will say that I will accept and stand behind any assertion or reference you might possibly make in reference to my own website (beijaflorbeyondthesunset@wordpress.com).

Booyah

PS Dr. Tara should be nominated for a sainthood. It wasnt untill I stumbled upon her stuff that I really understood exactly what was going on. Both my part and my partners. I pray one day she recieves the glory she deserves for her efforts.

http://www.shrink4men.com/ Dr. Tara J. Palmatier

Definitely not a saint. I have feet of clay just like everyone else. Glad you found the information on S4M helpful, Booyah. Awareness, no matter how painful it is, is better than the alternative.

Booyah

The movement also needs people in Washington DC and Canberra desperately. People protesting with signs in the background while prime ministers and presidents are being interviewed on other matters (as if theyll be covering male rights lol)

I am unfortunately not situated to help in this although I wish I was.

Primal

Delusions of female competence from a confused female CEO:

Lisa Hickey:

“Oh, sorry Richard, that wasn’t clear at all. I was referring to the thought of being a man on that cruise ship and being told “women and children first.” Horrifying. It should just never happen.

So many things went wrong on that ship — things that actually might have gone better if we all stopped looking at such rigid roles. The fact that the crew and captain didn’t radio for help right away. (Unable to admit a grave mistake quickly?) Then, when it was obvious there was trouble, few people stepped up to lead — many wanted to help but didn’t know how. There should always be leaders in an an emergency — men, women, doesn’t matter. And they should quickly assess the situation and hand off additional leadership as needed to those who can help take charge. From reading the accounts, it seemed to me that everyone would have been able to get off that ship safely if they had started evacuating earlier and people had worked together. Forget “women and children first” — it should be “let’s all work together so we can all get out alive.”

This kind of silly stupidity perfectly captures the kind of indoctrination that feminists have successfully foisted on the culture. With men going ‘woman’ and women believing that women are interchangeable with men as leaders and that everyone can become leaders after a captain abandons his ship, I’d sure hate to go cruising today. The survivors on this ship were very very lucky that they had time to sort through the confusion that comes from the loss of leadership.

As for Lisa Hickey, please please please don’t go into anything more serious than running a silly blog for feminists and for the male fools who respect feminists.

Not buying it

What a great response in your part Paul, TDOM & the rest of the team at AVFM to a very weak pathetic politically correct chivalrous/feminist based response on the part of TGMP.
man oh man , I don’t know what i expected from TGMP team? !!!
I’ was at a loss for words for a little while after i read & comprehended there response, i even tried to see if it has any different ((point)) or meaning than the old (GOOD MEN ALWAYS SACRIFICE THEMSELVES FOR THE BENEFIT OF OTHERS) !! as if good women can not do that ?? (please hit me with a ten by four on the head & call me silly, because i honestly expected more creativity or at least a different angel on their part.

sincerely Paul Thank you and the rest of the team for a great article & for exposing these people in general for the Intellectual Midgets that they are .

OneHundredPercentCotton

You can’t help being a bit embarassed…it’s like the 49ers playing against Middle School benchwarmers…

lisahickey

Paul, the answer to the question that you left out in your post is that there’s a difference between a good man and a good women because men have different issues than women. The difference in those issues means that on a day to day basis, men usually have to make different choices than women, and those choices get defined by society as good or not good.

At The Good Men Project, we are simply exploring the issues of men, and within that the notion of goodness. We are not defining good for anyone. We are not telling men how to be good. You can disagree with how we are going about it, but that’s what we are doing.

We are discussing the issues that our community wants to talk about as they relate to men. We are not an MRA site — you have done a wonderful job leading the men who see things from an MRA perspective. That is not us. We discuss all of the issues related to men — and that sometimes includes the good, sometimes the bad, and sometimes those that have to do with women.

I am always open to criticism — anyone who has worked with me, anyone who has actually honestly tried to engage with me knows that. Ditto for GMP. But as both you and I have discussed in the comments, there has to be a level of trust. There has to be at least some sense that the intention is to actually engage in a way that will be helpful to all.

This post does nothing to show me that you have that intention of engaging as allies. That is fine. I understand why you don’t trust us, and that is fine too. You can disagree with everything we are doing, but we have a discussion that has reached over 3 million unique visitors in eighteen months (and that number has nothing to do with page refreshes). You can continue to tell us we are doing something wrong — and I will listen to those who tell me anything that makes sense, within the framework of all we are trying to do, as long as it is in a way that doesn’t try to twist my words or take phrases out of context. That was what I saw in the comments last time, and that was why I commented the way I did.

I appreciate the discussion, and you can continue to do what you do so well over here, and I will continue to do what I do at Good Men Project. I’m sure our paths will cross again, and I wish you the best here.

Raven01

“lisahickey

Paul, the answer to the question that you left out in your post is that there’s a difference between a good man and a good women because men have different issues than women. The difference in those issues means that on a day-to-day basis, men usually have to make different choices than women, and those choices get defined by society as good or not good.”

What a load of verbal diarrhea. A lot of words to say nothing.
Lisa you missed your calling in politics. I’ll type slowly.
Name one choice that determines a “good man” that does not determine a “good woman”……. I bet the only thing you can come up with is “not leaving a toilet seat up”. There is nothing that is note directly the same when transferred to females or without a perfect analogue.

OneHundredPercentCotton

Toilet seat is good.

Also, a woman can forget an extremely embarassing or horrible one night stand by aborting all evidence of it.

Men have the “choice” to live with that bad memory by meekly paying for it for 18+ years IF he has a job, or going to prison IF he doesn’t.

…it’s what “Good Men” do.

mccrorie

Don’t be too harsh… I mean, they’re ‘exploring the issues’, which is a great way to hide the lack of a substantive dialogue. I come across this all the time at art school..

“This pile of trash I collected from the tip EXPLORES the ISSUE of post-modern gender essentialist relativistic roundabouts and forces the viewer to reconsider blah blah blah blah”

So what does it MEAN?

“lol I dunno!”

Paul Elam

Hi Lisa,

Well, after having considered (and opting out of) the idea of responding to this with another article, I will part this conversation with just a few questions – including the one that started this mess. I know, for all concerned, that I am asking in the rhetorical sense.

What is a single quality that differentiates what a good man is as opposed to a good woman? There are only two ways that can be answered, either with an example of something unique to male goodness, or with an acknowledgement that no such examples exist. All the fluff and obfuscation you and your team can manufacture won’t get you around that with people who choose to think.

And this statement, “Paul, the answer to the question that you left out in your post is that there’s a difference between a good man and a good women because men have different issues than women. The difference in those issues means that on a day to day basis, men usually have to make different choices than women, and those choices get defined by society, as good or not good.”

What a stunning cop out. We know all about societies expectations of men, Lisa, including a boatload of them furthered at GMP by feminist ideologues. That is the whole fucking point. But it is really harder to waste keystrokes on explaining that now than ever.

“At The Good Men Project, we are simply exploring the issues of men, and within that the notion of goodness. We are not defining good for anyone.”

There are many more examples, but presenting all of them would be a waste of time comparable to that of say, explaining why the very concept of a Good Men “Project” is not being about defining what a good man is.

In fairness, there is actually quite a bit of good material on your site. And I think the many statements pointing out your fairness in the comments are spot on. But there is a fundamental component missing here, and I must say it appears that the loss is escaping your vision entirely.

The thing about trust, Lisa, is that it is something that must be continually earned. It is much harder to maintain than it is to undermine. And with that, you continue to provide many reasons not to trust.

1. Failure to directly answer an honest question about the implications of gendering “goodness,” continues to paint you as evasive.

2. Auto-refreshing your site. I am happy you have gotten so many unique visitors, but pointing that out, and saying that it had nothing to do with auto-refreshing your site is just another obfuscation. And it leaves the question of why you are engaged in a public deception unanswered. Lisa Hickey, why are you engaged in the practice of auto-refreshing your website?

3. Telling me that you are not here to make friends or get people to agree is fine and respectable. Following that up with a shot at me for not having an “intention of engaging as allies,” does not add to your credibility in the least.

4. Henry Belanger’s “Meet the Men’s Rights Movement” in which he invited scorn and ridicule on all of us (after inviting us to work on articles for your site), remains. You have acknowledged that it was a mistake, and apologized for it…where? In the comments section? A private email? I never saw any of that. Why is that article still there? Where is your article retracting that position? It seems to be stashed away next to your credibility. http://goodmenproject.com/ethics-values/meet-the-mens-rights-movement/

All that aside, I agree that there were a few comments that might have been off the mark with you. Maybe. But here is the deal. You have a history of being less than trustworthy. Your website, while admittedly inclusive of some material that speaks well to the issues of men, is also saturated with the work of people that make their living off of misandry. Michael Flood, Amanda Marcotte, Hugo Schwyzer, and of course the writers of SPSMM and others; all people, Lisa, with a clear view of masculinity as something that is inherently defective, and in need of being fixed in the feminist mold. They are not engaging in your exploration of what it means to be a good man, they are following an ideological agenda that hinges on male vilification, and you are a chief enabler of that.

And you act as though you have no clue about any of this.

You have invited, insisted upon, hostility from MRA’s who have dedicated much of their lives to trying to stop what is happening to men and boys, and you have tossed a lack of credibility into that like gasoline in a fire.

I would very much like to see our paths cross again, and under better circumstances. But that crossing will never be pleasant as long as agents of hatred have refuge on your website, and until you start dealing with more integrity. That is something I can’t negotiate, and maintain my own values.

mccrorie

Well said, Paul.

I’ve been persevering with their articles but his one one really threw me

Good men are raised feminist? It’s a challenge for single mothers! And I bet it is!

It will be a challenge for the son to gradually understand how toxic and threatening his male sexuality is to women and how he needs to strongly moderate his behaviour in order to protect their feeeeelings.

“At The Good Men Project, we are simply exploring the issues of men, and within that the notion of goodness. We are not defining good for anyone. We are not telling men how to be good. You can disagree with how we are going about it, but that’s what we are doing.”

Blah. Lisa, you’re inviting all and sundry to define ‘male goodness’ FOR YOU. And are we to be surprised that feminists are jumping at the chance?

“And perhaps most crucial of all, how many all-girls schools can provide their pupils with the opportunity to lead and manage boys?”

The principal of the school who uttered this gem o’ wisdom is a twit to be sure.

Surely the reporter that sent it to the paper, and the proof reader, and the graphic artist, and the editor all played their part in a giant ‘twit ring’ making it readable on the stands and monitors.

“Twit ring”, yeah that suits.

http://thedomesticviolenceindustrylies.blogspot.com/ VAWAhorrors

I can see the problem… relating Goodness to Gender.

This is the result of 45 years of “Feminist” Domestic Violence Industry Evil Indoctrination that is now Indoctrinated into Politics, the Government, Courts, Police and General Public, Encouraging an Epidemic of False Accusations of Sexual Harassment, Domestic Violence and Rape, that:
– Women are Good, All Men are Violent and Rapists!
– Women are helpless Victims, Men are Perpetrators!
– Women need Help and Protection, Men must be Restrained, Prosecuted and Jailed!

Tom is constructing a syllogism: Some people are bad. All men are people; therefore, men are bad. What he isn’t doing is acknowledging the corollary syllogism: Some people are bad. All women are people; therefore, some women are bad. Thus the white knight ironically dehumanizes women.

Brendan

I should have written “All men are people; therefore, some men are bad.” My bad. I actually said what Tom really meant.

srginosu

dr. paul is the godfather.

Support AVFM!

Sponsored links

Hot on the web

Mental Health Corner

It’s day 24 of Domestic Violence Awareness Month for Men and Boys, the invisible victims of domestic violence. Today’s In His Own Words is an example of the systemic abuse to which men and boys are frequently subjected.